MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2913825740

Exploring Indigenous Spiritualities In-Relation: How Might Science and Math Education Become Different?

2018· article· en· W2913825740 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jesse Bazzul, Gale Russell, Florence Glanfield, Edward Doolittle, Dwayne Donald, Marc Higgins, Xia Ji

Bibliographic record

Venue2018 Conference of the Canadian Society for the Study of Education · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAfrican cultural and philosophical studies
Canadian institutionsFirst Nations University of CanadaUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpiritualitiesMindsetRelation (database)Openness to experienceIndigenousVariety (cybernetics)SociologySpiritualityScience educationPedagogyEpistemologySocial sciencePsychologySocial psychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The idea for this symposium took shape at the last CSSE Meeting in Toronto, where a discussion of ecoliteracy seemed to meander around questions and explorations of spirituality. This symposium attempts to put Indigenous Spiritualities in relation with education subfields (math and science education), which may often operate in a technical rational mindset, culture, and/or set of practices. The authors/presenters come together to engage this topic from a variety of perspectives in mathematics and science education to see how education, especially those subfields that often adhere strongly to Modern Western Ways of knowing, might open to different relational and significant ways of being in and knowing the world. This kind of epistemic and pedagogical opening will also require an openness to seriously engage in decolonizing work and an education that seeks more ecologically attentive, imaginative, and just ways of living in the world. We collectively affirm that engaging the spiritual in education is an essential part of learning to live differently in deeply troubled times and spaces.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0150.034
Scholarly communication0.0100.011
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0020.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.167
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.149 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2018 Conference of the Canadian Society for the Study of EducationSame topicAfrican cultural and philosophical studiesFrench-language works237,207